MCTS-Judge: Test-Time Scaling in LLM-as-a-Judge for Code Correctness Evaluation
read the original abstract
The LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm shows promise for evaluating generative content but lacks reliability in reasoning-intensive scenarios, such as programming. Inspired by recent advances in reasoning models and shifts in scaling laws, we pioneer bringing test-time computation into LLM-as-a-Judge, proposing MCTS-Judge, a resource-efficient, System-2 thinking framework for code correctness evaluation. MCTS-Judge leverages Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) to decompose problems into simpler, multi-perspective evaluations. Through a node-selection strategy that combines self-assessment based on historical actions in the current trajectory and the Upper Confidence Bound for Trees based on prior rollouts, MCTS-Judge balances global optimization and refinement of the current trajectory. We further designed a high-precision, unit-test-level reward mechanism to encourage the Large Language Model (LLM) to perform line-by-line analysis. Extensive experiments on three benchmarks and five LLMs demonstrate the effectiveness of MCTS-Judge, which improves the base model's accuracy from 41% to 80%, surpassing the o1-series models with 3x fewer tokens. Further evaluations validate the superiority of its reasoning trajectory in logic, analytics, thoroughness, and overall quality, while revealing the test-time scaling law of the LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
RankJudge: A Multi-Turn LLM-as-a-Judge Synthetic Benchmark Generator
RankJudge creates paired multi-turn conversations with isolated single-turn flaws to generate unambiguous benchmarks for LLM-as-a-judge systems across ML, biomedicine, and finance domains.
-
LLM-as-a-Judge for Human-AI Co-Creation: A Reliability-Aware Evaluation Framework for Coding
LLM judges for human-AI coding co-creation show moderate performance (ROC-AUC 0.59) and low agreement, with co-creation success concentrating early in interactions.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.